Literature DB >> 19912184

Transfer of cysto-urethroscopy skills from a virtual-reality simulator to the operating room: a randomized controlled trial.

Barbara M A Schout1, Hildo J K Ananias, Bart L H Bemelmans, Frank C H d'Ancona, Arno M M Muijtjens, Valerie E M G Dolmans, Albert J J A Scherpbier, Ad J M Hendrikx.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether real-time cysto-urethroscopy (CUS) performance improves by simulator-based training (criterion or predictive validity), addressing the research question 'Does practical skills training on the URO Mentor (UM, Simbionix USA Corp., Cleveland, OH, USA) virtual-reality simulator improve the performance of flexible CUS in patients'. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Participants (71 interns from Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, CHE, and 29 from University Medical Centre Groningen, UMCG) were randomized to carry out CUS in a patient after training on the UM (UM-trained, 50) or without training on UM (control, 50). The assessment of real-time performance consisted of scoring on a Global Rating Scale (GRS) by supervisors unaware of training status. Data were analysed using stepwise multiple linear regression. The effect size (ES) indication for correlations was used to interpret the magnitude of a standard regression coefficient (beta); an ES of 0.10, 0.30 and 0.50 were considered small, moderate and large, respectively. The study was approved by the Medical Review Ethics Committees of the participating hospitals.
RESULTS: Overall, the group that received training performed significantly better than the controls (P < or = 0.003, beta range 0.30-0.47). There was no effect of training for participants with a specific preference for a surgical speciality in two of five GRS scores. Participants from CHE obtained higher GRS 3 scores than those from UMCG. Significantly more UMCG trainees indicated having had stress than those from CHE (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The results showed that interns who had trained on UM outperformed controls for a CUS procedure in a patient. Training for CUS on the UM is to be recommended for learning to respect tissue, procedural knowledge, flow of procedure and forward planning. Use of the UM to train interns with a specific interest in a surgical speciality in handling instruments, and time and motion, seems to be of limited value.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19912184     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09049.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  9 in total

Review 1.  Simulation-based training and assessment in urological surgery.

Authors:  Abdullatif Aydin; Nicholas Raison; Muhammad Shamim Khan; Prokar Dasgupta; Kamran Ahmed
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 2.  How valid are commercially available medical simulators?

Authors:  Jj Stunt; Ph Wulms; Gm Kerkhoffs; J Dankelman; Cn van Dijk; Gjm Tuijthof
Journal:  Adv Med Educ Pract       Date:  2014-10-14

Review 3.  Systematic review on the effectiveness of augmented reality applications in medical training.

Authors:  E Z Barsom; M Graafland; M P Schijven
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Simulation-based training for flexible cystoscopy - A randomized trial comparing two approaches.

Authors:  Sarah Bube; Julia Dagnaes-Hansen; Oria Mahmood; Malene Rohrsted; Flemming Bjerrum; Lisbeth Salling; Rikke B Hansen; Lars Konge
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2020-01-03

Review 5.  The current and possible future role of 3D modelling within oesophagogastric surgery: a scoping review.

Authors:  Henry Robb; Gemma Scrimgeour; Piers Boshier; Anna Przedlacka; Svetlana Balyasnikova; Gina Brown; Fernando Bello; Christos Kontovounisios
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-03-11       Impact factor: 3.453

Review 6.  The current role of simulation in urological training.

Authors:  Ryan Preece
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2015-03-27

7.  High acceptability of a newly developed urological practical skills training program.

Authors:  Anna H de Vries; Scheltus J van Luijk; Albert J J A Scherpbier; Ad J M Hendrikx; Evert L Koldewijn; Cordula Wagner; Barbara M A Schout
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 2.264

8.  Defining competency in flexible cystoscopy: a novel approach using cumulative Sum analysis.

Authors:  Kenneth R MacKenzie; Jonathan Aning
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2016-06-13       Impact factor: 2.264

9.  Establishing a national high fidelity cadaveric emergency urology simulation course to increase trainee preparedness for independent on-call practice: a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Nicholas Bullock; Thomas Ellul; Suzanne Biers; James Armitage; Sophia Cashman; Krishna Narahari; Oleg Tatarov; Neil Fenn; Pradeep Bose; Jonathan Featherstone; Owen Hughes
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 2.463

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.